YOUR VIEW: City schools need reformer, not insider

PHILLIP KASSEL AND MISSY GILBARG

Saturday

Jun 30, 2007 at 11:30 PM

In announcing his retirement as superintendent of the New Bedford schools, Michael Longo, in a thinly veiled reference to the controversy that surrounded his appointment, advised those who will choose his successor to resist "caving in to special interest groups or agendas" (see "Longo announces his retirement as superintendent," The Standard-Times, 6/12/07). While Mr. Longo deserves gratitude for his 34 years of public service, he mischaracterizes both the community-based search committee that did not support his candidacy and those who were outraged when the School Committee selected him nonetheless.

In announcing his retirement as superintendent of the New Bedford schools, Michael Longo, in a thinly veiled reference to the controversy that surrounded his appointment, advised those who will choose his successor to resist "caving in to special interest groups or agendas" (see "Longo announces his retirement as superintendent," The Standard-Times, 6/12/07). While Mr. Longo deserves gratitude for his 34 years of public service, he mischaracterizes both the community-based search committee that did not support his candidacy and those who were outraged when the School Committee selected him nonetheless.

These people were not "special interests" with "agendas." They were New Bedford residents who believed that candidates from outside the city could do a better job of challenging ingrained and ineffective policies and practices that result in many students failing to acquire knowledge and develop skills that they need both in life and to meet grade-appropriate academic and achievement standards. These policies and practices, not surprisingly, result in one of the state's lowest graduation rates.

In fact, our school system has only gotten worse over the course of Mr. Longo's tenure in vital respects. Those who believed that an insider could not take on the school establishment do not deserve to be derided and mischaracterized; they were right.

During his tenure, Mr. Longo failed to propose necessary sweeping and comprehensive reforms.

Members of our organization, the Coalition Against Poverty Educational Collaborative, have consistently called for a focus on the educational mainstream in upgrading the schools. We have asked for structural change: an examination of counterproductive practices that research demonstrates causes students to lose interest in school and do poorly — excessive discipline, high rates of grade detention, transfer to an alternative school that Mr. Longo frankly admits is a warehouse, academic penalties he tells us he knows are counterproductive, the relentless communication of low expectations to poor kids and those of color, and hiring practices resulting in a staff unreflective of the backgrounds, culture, and race of the student body.

Instead, Mr. Longo has trumpeted separate programs designed to address the needs of purportedly "at risk" kids. These are programs that leave the mainstream mostly untouched.

But Mr. Longo recently gave us hope. He agreed to hire an outside expert respected by all elements of the school and advocacy communities to do a comprehensive study of secondary and alternative school practices. The report envisioned would provide an objective view enabling discussion that moves beyond disparate subjective perceptions about the school system.

Mr. Longo met with the expert and received a full and specific proposal for the work. He told us that the study was a done deal, and that recommendations flowing from the report would be incorporated in district three-year planning. Assistant Superintendent for Equity and Diversity Fred Fuentes announced the district's intention to go forward with the outside study at a public event we sponsored in March. We were thrilled, believing that a daring step that could lead to genuine reform was finally in the works. We complimented Mr. Longo on demonstrating political will.

Then our hopes were dashed. In a shockingly clipped e-mail from Mr. Longo's secretary we were told that there was no money for the study, though we were assured early on that funding was available. We asked the expert if there was any attempt to negotiate the price tag. He said "no."

At a recent meeting of a group that is looking at alternative education, Mr. Longo said that "money was no object" in fashioning a remedy. If money was "no object" in one context, how could it be an insuperable barrier in another?

Mr. Longo did not return our call to set a meeting and receive an explanation. We don't believe that money was the real problem, though we do not know exactly what motivated him to go back on his promise to us and the community. All we know for sure is that a move that had great promise was scuttled.

In any case, the "special interests" were correct about Michael Longo. When it came right down to it, he lacked the will to do what he recognized needed doing. Next time, perhaps the School Committee should listen to those with the "agenda" of creating fundamental change in our schools. History now demonstrates clearly that this school system needs a reformer, not an insider.

Never miss a story

Choose the plan that's right for you.
Digital access or digital and print delivery.